[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Meeting public demand
Communication is a specialized field that should be placed in the hands of
trained communicators experts who work in consultation with experts from the
nuclear area.
Who has high-qualified experience activities does not mean he is necessarily
a communicator expert. A well-qualified expert in nuclear technology can
provide the most important information to be used by a good communicator.
Nuclear communication connects the message to basic values that include
security, safety, trust, right to choose and freedom.
To develop a comprehensive communication programme on specific nuclear
issues, five elements are needed:
a) Clearly stated the nuclear programme objectives;
b) Identification of the audience according to the objectives of the nuclear
communication programme;
c) Opinion research of audience to identify the need and the messages to be
communicated and the channels of communication;
d) A management plan with clearly stated goals for each audience that will
help to achieve the objectives, and which considers a number of options, and
e) An evaluation plan to incorporate lessons learned in future planning.
Now I ask in terms of any Radiation Safety National Association: Does the
above exist?
Is there in the National Radiation Safety Association a Group, or few
members devoted to analysis of Radiation Safety Communication?
Is there in the Radiation Safety Society a Group that go to the media trying
to open doors to communicate?
The media open his door, however we must to go there. It is not enough just
to write letter. This is important, however must important is to go to the
media, to present ourselves, ask for space and this Radiation Safety
Association can do.
We are responsible for many situation, because we know the problem, however
until now we weren't able to find the alternatives and actions to that we
propose as solution.
----- Original Message -----
From: Michael Stabin <michael.g.stabin@vanderbilt.edu>
To: Jerry Cohen <jjcohen@PRODIGY.NET>
Cc: <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 12:22 AM
Subject: Re: Meeting public demand
Jerry Cohen writes -
> My point is that
> NRC could have saved much time, effort, and most of all, money if they
had
> just short-circuited the process by determining the public/political
climate
> in the first place and ignored the science which was apparently of little
> importance in this case. I am sure there are several other examples of
this
> sort of problem . Why bother with the science if it can have no impact in
a
> system pervaded by spin, politics, and PR.
This is indeed a bad situation. It is the supposed antidote to the other
extreme of the government ramming policies down the public's throat, because
"they know what's good for you". The antidote, however, has worked out to
be, in my opinion, almost as bad as the poison, and at times I refer to this
in fairly strong terms as a "failure of democracy". People in a democracy
don't want the government acting without the consent of the governed, and I
am one of them. But with our mass media driven culture, those with the best
skill in manipulating opinion, **often intentionally spreading
misinformation in direct contradiction to known scientific facts** have
successfully managed to control the debate on many scientific issues, of
which radiation protection is just one. By appealing to emotion and
repeating often absurd claims in drumbeat fashion, the public begins to
speak the mantras of those with the best PR engines, and fact and logic are
left as roadkill.
I agree that merely complaining about it on Radsafe is not the answer. Ruth
Sponsler's (and others') encouragement to be involved in schools is part of
the solution. Barbara Hamrick's call for help in influencing legislation is
another good example of how to actively participate in the remedy. Public
information activities in general are another. I'm quite pleased at the
astounding success of the HPS' Ask the Expert web site feature. Gen Roessler
is doing a marvelous job, and has assembled an Associate Editor team to
handle the very high volume of requests that are coming in there. I have
been able to interact with a number of people directly, sometimes
repeatedly, and try to calm some of their irrational fears, driven by
irresponsible antinuke groups and the media, about radiation doses from
simple medical procedures and the like.
This is one of my drumbeats - if you understand radiation, you have a
professional responsibility to be part of the voice in whatever communities
you are part of to help bring a rational perspective to these public policy
debates in our society. You can't do it all yourself, and it can't be done
in a day. But if we each do our part, write our letters, know our facts,
show respect to our opponents, and hold our ground, it can be done.
"First they ignore you; Then they laugh at you; Then they fight you; Then
you win."
Mike
Michael G. Stabin, PhD, CHP
Assistant Professor of Radiology and Radiological Sciences
Department of Radiology and Radiological Sciences
Vanderbilt University
1161 21st Avenue South
Nashville, TN 37232-2675
Phone (615) 343-0068
Fax (615) 322-3764
e-mail michael.g.stabin@vanderbilt.edu
************************************************************************
You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,
send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu Put the text "unsubscribe
radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.
You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/